Instant Friends

[Tony Vargas]

Depending on how the DM runs with it, this low-level utility could replace a Skill Challenge at any level. Trying to convince a more powerful creature to let you pass, for instance, might be a low-level challenge. Getting help/cooperation from a local leader is a sample Skill Challenge in the DMG. One character's action, one roll of a die, and *poof* such skill Challenges are gone. (And, frankly, probably failed - I suppose the optimal thing to do would be to keep the spell in your back pocket for when you /failed/ a Skill Challenge like that, then just pop it out and be your own deus ex machina.)

I didn't know that Essentials was moving away from the design goals behind Skill Challenges - keeping all PCs involved in non-combat activities, and keeping a single check from derailing the plot, were two reasons that I've heard - what's the impetus for new stuff like this, I wonder?

 

[P1NBACK]

Depending on how the DM runs with it, this low-level utility could replace a Skill Challenge at any level. Trying to convince a more powerful creature to let you pass, for instance, might be a low-level challenge. Getting help/cooperation from a local leader is a sample Skill Challenge in the DMG. One character's action, one roll of a die, and *poof* such skill Challenges are gone. (And, frankly, probably failed - I suppose the optimal thing to do would be to keep the spell in your back pocket for when you /failed/ a Skill Challenge like that, then just pop it out and be your own deus ex machina.)

I think it depends entirely on what the goal of the skill challenge is. Does the local leader have to risk life and property for the PCs? Then, chances are it might not happen, and you'll still need to result to Diplomacy and Bluff and Intimidate.

Or, maybe the Instant Friends is just what you need to get the audience in the first place.

Does the leader have a trusted adviser that can detect such magical charms?

What happens after the spell wears off and the leader realizes he's been "duped" into doing the PCs bidding?

There's more to this spell than what you guys are making it out to be.

That's what makes it interesting and good to me.

I didn't know that Essentials was moving away from the design goals behind Skill Challenges - keeping all PCs involved in non-combat activities, and keeping a single check from derailing the plot, were two reasons that I've heard - what's the impetus for new stuff like this, I wonder?

I think you're exaggerating a bit here.

 

[Holy Bovine]

Yes, and what does a trusted friend DO?

Honestly probably something like this

Just because something was in 1e doesn't make it good. I hate to tell you all this but I played 12 years of 1e and there was a LOT of 1e that was utter rubbish.

Of course there was way more that was brilliant. Stop talking to everyone like they are 5 year olds.

 

[AngryMojo]

Depending on how the DM runs with it, this low-level utility could replace a Skill Challenge at any level. Trying to convince a more powerful creature to let you pass, for instance, might be a low-level challenge. Getting help/cooperation from a local leader is a sample Skill Challenge in the DMG. One character's action, one roll of a die, and *poof* such skill Challenges are gone.

Just as a random thought, yes this could bypass a skill challenge.
It would also bypass the XP that the skill challenge would garner.
It's been my experience that players will bend over backwards for additional XP, and refuse to give up said XP whenever they can avoid it. I remember plenty of wizards back in the 3.5 days who wouldn't scribe scrolls because of the XP cost. I never hesitated on the off chance that I got to play and not DM, but I've seen more than my fair share who wouldn't.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Just as a random thought, yes this could bypass a skill challenge.
It would also bypass the XP that the skill challenge would garner.

Nothing I know of in the rules would say that solving an SC by some means other than skill checks would negate any of the XP award. In fact the rules tend to suggest otherwise. I guess it would be up to the DM, but I don't think I'd dock the party XP simply because they happened to have thought to bring along a power that made it trivial.

Of course there was way more that was brilliant. Stop talking to everyone like they are 5 year olds.

Whatever, lol. AD&D had its day. It was long ago. Things progress. What part of being a flagship RPG product is it about 4e that would make one want to be dwelling in 1979? AD&D was a fun game, but really it was in spite of the mechanics, not because of them.

What happens after the spell wears off and the leader realizes he's been "duped" into doing the PCs bidding?

There's more to this spell than what you guys are making it out to be.

That's what makes it interesting and good to me.



I think you're exaggerating a bit here.

Actually the effect line says explicitly that the target does not remember being charmed. They MAY notice that you tried to charm them if you fail, if they are higher level than you are. Otherwise they remain blithely ignorant. So it is actually a zero risk ploy against anyone of your level or lower. For a higher level orb wizard with a couple items and a jacked up wisdom score it is pretty close to a sure bet against anyone.

Nobody is saying that the spell has UNLIMITED utility. Just that it is a pain in the arse to adjudicate it, it tends to either preclude or greatly simplify a whole swath of potentially challenging or interesting situations, and is very hard to balance.

The point about balance is actually not that it is so hard to balance, it is that it would be UTTERLY UNNECESSARY to carefully balance a ritual. You can make it as weak as you care to, it takes virtually no resources to acquire. So what if it is of very little utility? The one time it will come in handy pays for the trivial gp cost of buying it. Surely even if the DM is a real hard case on ruling against it working in a given situation there will be SOME situations where said ritual will come in very handy nonetheless. If you rule the POWER version that harshly then you're basically screwing the player out of the use of a utility power that the rules say they should legitimately get as much use out of as say Shield, which is a good bit. So I would find the ritual to be a superior implementation on that basis. The DM now has a real choice as to how much to let the players get away with.

I really don't get the big bias against ritual magic. It seems like people are saying basically "I don't want to have to plan ahead at all, I just want my solution to be easy so I can be lazy about it and just whip it out at a moment's notice." Personally I like to make the players think a bit more than that. I feel like this whole trend is just catering to players.

Even if you are of the opinion that this is a lovely power and all why is it so low level? I never understood why such powerful magics were so low level in AD&D either. I mean fireball is nice and all but it has only very limited uses. Charm Person or its 4e incarnation have a vast array of uses, some of which can produce results all out of proportion to the thought or energy put into using them. It is pretty hard for me to see the logic of where this is a low heroic tier power. It could just as easily be relegated to paragon or even epic, or be a PP utility power that requires you to at least really dedicate your character options to using it. It was a bad move in AD&D 1e for it to be a level 1 spell, why do we need to repeat even THAT obvious mistake?

 

[Garthanos]

Nobody is saying that the spell has UNLIMITED utility. Just that it is a pain in the arse to adjudicate it, it tends to either preclude or greatly simplify a whole swath of potentially challenging or interesting situations, and is very hard to balance.

We had a great time with a situation where we were trying to get a small girl to tell us a secret and it was fun we got into interacting with the character.

This wizards undermining interesting elements of the game invalidating the need for skills (with a lower opportunity cost item - ie - they can spell book swap it out ) and creative thinking in how to use them is exactly the return of the batman wizard.

Overly versatile spell casting is one ingredient in marginalizing martial classes.

 

[Psikerlord#]

Just on bypassing skill challenges (of which I'm not a fan, anyway), I would say that the wizard sacrificing a daily to do so (with a swingy roll) is fair enough. Yep, the one skill challenge is trumped by the wizard and his magic. No biggie. If the DM reeeeeaally wants to do a skill challenge, I'm sure he can slot one in later...

 

[Garthanos]

Just on bypassing skill challenges (of which I'm not a fan, anyway),

There you go complete explanation of your attitude right there...

It was interesting and made everyone part of the action. Instead of one guy wavy wavy kaching. Really and truly and honestly I am quite glad my wizard didnt have the damn power.

Sheesh the sheer number of scenarios and frequency of them that it could short circuit, well not if most all you are doing is orc bashing it might be a bit less useful. But then all you have to do is spell book swap it out.

Very little opportunity cost and whopping level 2.

We have skill challenges occur somewhat as natural parts of the ongoing story... slotting one in.. yup more evidence of why you dont care for them - sounds artificial.

 

[FireLance]

While I do appreciate the old-school flavor of this spell, I was, and still am, uncomfortable with the amount of DM adjudication a spell of this nature requires, both as a player and as a DM, especially for something as inherently nebulous and variable as what a person would do for a trusted friend. In addition, I would have preferred it if it worked with or within the existing system of skill checks and skill challenges, which, although still subject to a significant amount of DM adjudication, still presents some structure and guidelines in the form of skill check DCs and number of successes required.

The way I would house-rule this spell would be: instead of being treated as a "trusted friend" by the target for 1d4 hours, the spell grants you 1d4 "points of influence" with the target for the duration of the spell or until they are used. A "point of influence" may be used to either grant a +5 power bonus to a Charisma check or a Charisma-based skill check to influence the target, or to re-roll a failed Charisma check or Charisma-based skill check against the target.

In addition, the spell suppresses any negative emotions or memories that the target may have with respect to you at the time that the spell is cast for the duration of the spell (the target regains them when the spell expires), so that initially, the target will be at least indifferent to you. However, the target will react normally to and remember subsequent impositions, provocations and/or hostile actions, even if the spell is still active.

The spell lasts four hours or until the target is attacked by you or your allies.

 

[Reigan]

If we are to go down this route I would rather it was as a development of the skill power system, this should have been a bluff power, not a wizard power. The whole point of limiting class based non-combat abilities was to prevent "must have" classes and I don't want to see those days again.